View Full Version : If Horne signs our draftboard changes

04-19-2001, 09:43 AM
A lot of pundits, myself included, won't be surprised to see the Chiefs select Moss. However, if the Chiefs end up with Horne, and it looks like they will, then the value of a smallish PR/KR WR drops. I don't know about the WR position in general - the Chiefs may still be tempted by a Rod Gardner or Chad Johnson since these are bigger and more prototypical receivers. But lets assume with the addition of Horne that the Chiefs have ruled out WR in the first round.

That would move up defensive positions on the Chiefs draft board. Hopefully a certain LB, Morgan, is on the list. Almost everyone would agree that the biggest roles on our board are QB, RB, DT - what takes the WR spot? LB? Or DB?

04-19-2001, 09:51 AM
LB most definately...the signing of Crockett to aide KC's young DB's put LB slightly ahead of DB in the list.

04-19-2001, 09:56 AM
Of all the positions on the team, the only one that's NEVER been mentioned is LB.

This means 1 of 2 things:

There's no chance in hell we'll draft someone like Dan Morgan.

We're wanting Dan Morgan...

04-19-2001, 10:07 AM
I don't think Horne rules out Moss. I don't see Ricks in the future. We brought him in for a look, didnt like what we saw obviously, and will part ways after June 1st. Parker? Ditto. Vermiel and Saunders used both Horne and Hakim in STL. Why not Horne and Moss in KC? I would love to have Morgan, but DV has already stated he was looking for positions that handle the ball and make him look smart. Tomlinson and Duece should be gone. No QBs. IMO, WR is the pick. I think DV and Carl will shoot off a rocket in their pants if they can swap 1st rounders for Green and find Moss sitting there at 20.

04-19-2001, 10:14 AM
I think (and hope) you nailed it. Chiefs would be stupid not to want Morgan (wouldn't be the first time). Whole lotta posturing going on in this poker game, and I must say that IF the Chiefs are targeting Morgan, they've done a fantastic deception job so far by simply not talking about him at all.
Sign Horne, draft Morgan!

04-19-2001, 10:20 AM
I don't think signing Horne kills drafting Moss, but the needs at DT, RB, and QB hopefully do.

04-19-2001, 10:27 AM
Does anybody know if the Chiefs brought in Morgan for a visit? I know there was a list in the Star a few weeks back, but I couldn't find it online.

04-19-2001, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by htismaqe
Of all the positions on the team, the only one that's NEVER been mentioned is LB.

This means 1 of 2 things:

There's no chance in hell we'll draft someone like Dan Morgan.

We're wanting Dan Morgan...

I have a gut feeling that this is the case...I have mentioned it before on the board that Bill Tobin did the same thing when he took Trev Alberts 5th overall...He wanted him so bad that he would never mention LB as a position that would be addressed...Granted that didn't work out that well due to injuries but I feel like this could be similar.

Factor in our inability to stop the run...Watching Baltimore and TB become contenders with no offense because of great D makes me think they are only keeping quite on this because with our pick being at #12 and Morgan being the only LB that is considered a high 1st round pick someone would jump in front of them....

04-19-2001, 10:53 AM
Drafting Morgan doesn't fit the mold of the Rams. It would befit the old Chiefs though. I tend to think that Morgan will be passed up by the Chiefs because they want to get the offensive pieces in place and there they have some big holes to fill immediately.

But - if they were to draft Morgan it would be a good start to building a team and not just an offense this year. I would really like to see the two styles mix. The Rams offense and the old guts and glory Chiefs defense. I think Morgan is a big stepping stone to that team.

I think the only way the Chiefs could have hidden their interest in Morgan is if they didn't have one. However, now that the draft is here and it looks like one of our coveted RB's won't be there - now DV and CP are starting to look at Morgan.

04-19-2001, 10:58 AM
I am 95% certain San Fran will draft Morgan with the #9. They have a HUGE need at run-stuffing defenders - especially in the middle. In their division, they face Faulk, Williams and Anderson... all three very good runners. Morgan is a logical fit: big, strong, solid run stuffing MLB.

Devin Vierth
04-19-2001, 11:02 AM
On the Chief's website there is an article 2001 Chiefs Draft Preview.

At the end of the article Vermeil is asked: "What position don't you feel good about?"

These are the positions that he listed:

WR --"We have two starters and some young kids not that tested....we need that third guy."

TE--"...depth at tight end is our concern..."

LB--"Outside linebackers, too."

Dan Morgan?

04-19-2001, 11:37 AM
That's odd, I remember him saying in an interview about a month or so ago that they weren't really looking at linebacker as a priority spot. I guess after more film work, that opinion may have changed...

04-19-2001, 12:00 PM
I would love to see Morgan in red and gold, but do not see him getting by SF and Carolina, both need RBs too, but if Mac, and LD go early, one will have to draft Morgan, though both are trying to trade down, don't think it will happen. I just don't want Bennett, Smoot, or Trent Green at #12. Moss is not my choice either, and for chrissakes, you mean there isn't a KR available in the later rounds.

04-19-2001, 12:36 PM
"But - if they were to draft Morgan it would be a good start to building a team and not just an offense this year. I would really like to see the two styles mix. The Rams offense and the old guts and glory Chiefs defense. I think Morgan is a big stepping stone to that team."

I am in complete agreement with Arrowhead! Even with a completely new coaching staff & system, DV would do well to look at KC's Defense when they had guys like one Derrick Thomas, Neil Smith, Dale Carter, etc. If he was to mesh that relentless attacking style of defense with the extremely potent Rams style offense...LOOK OUT! Now, you have to have the horses like the previously mentioned players to make such an attacking D work(enter my plug for Morgan)...I said it before, I think KC would look back at the drafting of Morgan in the same light that they look back at the drafting of Derrick T. He could be the nucleus of a very promising future on the defensive side of the ball!!

04-19-2001, 01:23 PM
I still cant get my mind around the fact that our LB corps were decent to good in 1999 but completely invisible in 2000...Did these players suddenly forget how to be good LB's or was it something else?

I think it was something else...Donnie Edwards does not go from a pro bowl caliber to a ghost of an LB in one year. Patton does not go from the leading tackler to the bench in one year because of age.

I dont think we really know what we have until we see this team play without the Marty or Gunther effect on it to really know where KC is weak.

I still think our biggest area of need is RB, QB, DT, LB, OL, CB in that order.

04-19-2001, 01:33 PM
DT, QB, OG, RB, LB, OL, WR, P/KR, in that order.


04-19-2001, 01:38 PM
Gaz: same argument applies to the DT position as the LB position. Some would argue, Clint maybe, that the loss of Glock actually improves our DT position.

DT is not something we need to take via #12. DT is deep this year and can be taken in later rounds. Besides, we actually have depth at that position.

04-19-2001, 01:40 PM
Well, it seems that some of the Crams sympathizers from the other board made it here. I believe them.

We're set at every position, except the "Trent Green" position. Other teams call that QB, but we all know who our superbowl savior is...

04-19-2001, 01:50 PM

I can't help it if I am a Defense Homer...

NEEDS a DT to stuff those RBs and crush those QBs.

04-19-2001, 02:31 PM
A few of them are intelligent, and even talk a little smack, not unlike Mile High and JQ, this is acceptable, but don't let them turn this into another BB like the one we left.

04-19-2001, 02:52 PM
My order has it like this QB . . RB . . DT . . LB . . WR . . G . .CB

04-19-2001, 02:54 PM
When it comes to the draft, I have always been of the belief that you list your needs and then draft the best player that fits a need...If two players are very similar then draft the one that plays the position that you believe is the larger need...

For example, many people would argue that RB is our biggest need. However, if I believe Morgan will be a perennial Pro Bowler while I believe a Michael Bennett will be just a slightly above average starter....Assuming Morgan fills a need then I take Morgan...Five years from now if Morgan is viewed in the same light as a Derrick Brooks or Ray Lewis it want matter that RB was a bigger need during that draft...

04-19-2001, 02:56 PM
We have 3 capable Guards. We need another tackle. I don't want to see Will Shields out there at left tackle again.

04-19-2001, 02:59 PM
Thats about the best way to go about drafting. You put your list on the board the most desired players in order. When its your turn you take the highest desired player that meets your needs. I would assume that most teams go that route.

However, I think Denver sticks to the best available athelete rule. Not sure how to rate their draft success. Except for the RB's, which are a success due to the system they play in, Denver's draft record isn't stellar. Certainly not last years number one anyways (knock on wood).

04-19-2001, 03:02 PM
We have one great gaurd and one decent gaurd. A good solid young prospect would be a blessing. I don't have a lot of faith in our backup gaurds.

04-19-2001, 03:09 PM
Donald Willis is a capable backup. Jeff Blackshier can play as good as any average guard in the league. And Will is the man. Plus, we have toyed with moving Riley inside. We have no backup tackle.

04-19-2001, 03:30 PM
My .02 on the needs list.

1) QB
2) RB
3) CB
4) MLB
5) OG
6) DT

I would love to see a Warren Sapp clone in the middle of the D-line, but would rather see Faulk, James, Taylor clone in the back-field.

04-19-2001, 03:49 PM
Quarterback is priority #1 Whether it's a pick or a trade or a FA. From there....
#2. Running Back (I think Duece will fall to #12, because Bennett will go early)
#3. Defensive line (Dan Williams is just as much of a liability as Glock was, and our DEs are injury prone. In fact, all of our defensive linemen are injury prone.)
#4. O Line (I am leaning towards a quality backup tackle... Not guard.)
#5. Wide Reciever (After Horne, who's our 4th guy?)
#6. Fullback (Donnel is gone and no one is there to back up Tony.)
#7. Corner
#8. Linebacker